Sahab Singh Gahlawat And Ors vs Health And Family Welfare Department And Ors

V. Ajay Kumar, J

For the reasons stated therein, the MA seeking condonation of delay in filing the OA is allowed.

The applicants, 4 in number, and working as contractual Operation Theatre Technicians in the respondent-Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, filed the OA seeking quashing of the Annexure A-1 Office Order 982 dated 16.11.2012 whereunder the respondents have revised/reduced the pay of the applicants retrospectively.

The applicants were appointed as contractual Operation Theatre Technicians, after following due procedure, initially for a period of 89 days on different dates during the years 2000 and 2001. However, the said contractual period has been extended from time to time and accordingly, they have been working even as on today, however, on the same basis, with appropriate enhancement in their pay scales.

When the pay of the applicants have been revised from Rs.9300 + 4200 + usual allowances to that of Rs.7510 + 2400 + usual allowances vide Office Order 859 dated 29.11.2010, they had filed OA No.1781/2011. The said OA was disposed of by this Tribunal, by order dated 02.03.2012, after quashing the said Office Order 859 dated 29.11.2010 on the ground of non-following of principles of natural justice before issuing the same and with a direction to the respondents to first issue a sufficient notice to the applicants and after hearing their versions, to pass fresh order.

In terms of the aforesaid orders, the respondents after issuing notice to the applicants and after hearing them, passed the Annexure A-1 Office Order 982 dated 16.11.2012 again refixing the pay of the applicants in the same manner, i.e., with effect from 01.09.2008, or the date of joining of the applicants, whichever is earlier. Hence the OA.

Heard Ms. Tanya Tiwary with Ms. Neelam Tiwari for Shri Rajeev Aggarwal, learned counsel for the applicants, Mrs. Harvinder Oberoi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the pleadings on record.

The learned counsel for the applicants, Ms. Tanya Tiwary submits that the notice/opportunity given by the respondents before passing the impugned order is insufficient and cannot be said that they have followed the principles of natural justice in true spirit. She further submits that once granted a higher pay scale reducing the same with retrospective effect, is illegal and arbitrary. She further submits that the impugned order is also violative of the orders of this Tribunal in OA No.1781/2011 dated 02.03.2012. The reduction of the pay of the applicants in terms of another order of this Tribunal in OA No.521/2002 and OA No.522/2002 dated 07.11.2002 is also bad, as the applicants were not parties to the said OA, and the same was not binding on the applicants.

On the other hand, Mrs. Harvinder Oberoi, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that as per the recommendations of the 5th CPC, the pay scale of OT Assistant was fixed at Rs.3050-4590 and OT Technician at Rs.5000-8000 and OT Technical Assistant at Rs.4500-7000 and OT Technical Supervisor at Rs.5500-9000. Since as per the said fixation, the OT Technician posts being the feeder post to Technical Assistant was getting the higher pay scale as compared to the Technical Assistant, noticing the said anomaly, the Health and Family Welfare Department in consultation with Ministry of Finance, Government of India and Finance Department of the Government of NCTD, vide its order dated 29.01.2004, rolled back the pay scale of OT Technician to Rs.4000-6000 from Rs.5000-8000 retrospectively w.e.f. 01.01.1996, however, waived off the recoveries of the overpayments already made on account of the wrong fixation of pay scale in the higher scale. The same was circulated to all vide order dated 29.01.2004.

She further submits that in pursuance of the orders of this Tribunal in OA No.521/2002 and OA No.522/2002 dated 07.11.2002 in M/s Technical Staff Operation Theatre Association Vs. Union of India and Another, department issued a separate speaking order dated 20.09.2005 issuing clarification/instructions with regard to the roll back of the pay scales in respect of OT Technicians vide order dated 20.9.2005, and thereafter also, the department issued different orders on the same subject and the said issue was challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in W.P. ( C) No.4391/2010 and connected cases titled Government of NCT of Delhi Vs. Raja Ram and the same were allowed on 27.11.2013. It is further submitted that the applicants are working as contractual OT Technicians and are being paid the same pay scales on par with the regular newly recruited OT Technicians and once the revision of pay scales in respect of regular recruited Technicians is accepted, the applicants cannot claim any excess pay scale than the regular employees.

Admittedly, the applicants are working as contractual OT Technicians. The respondents have revised the pay scale of all regular OT Technicians also and the same was applied to the applicants also. The applicants have not denied the fact of dismissal of W.P. (C) No.4391/2010 and connected cases denying identical claim in identical circumstances. It is also admitted that though the excess payments have been made to the applicants and the pay scale was rolled back with retrospective effect, the respondents have waived off all the recoveries from the applicants.

In the circumstances and for the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any merit in the OA and accordingly the OA is dismissed. No costs.